-
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: From P100 to P100' : a new citation-rank approach (2014)
0.08
0.07736089 = product of:
0.15472178 = sum of:
0.15472178 = sum of:
0.043451507 = weight(_text_:r in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043451507 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.29258826 = fieldWeight in 1431, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1431)
0.06264399 = weight(_text_:l in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06264399 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.35131297 = fieldWeight in 1431, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1431)
0.048626285 = weight(_text_:22 in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048626285 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15710177 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1431, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1431)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 17:05:18
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.; Wagner, C.S.: ¬The relative influences of government funding and international collaboration on citation impact (2019)
0.07
0.06775117 = product of:
0.13550234 = sum of:
0.13550234 = sum of:
0.03258863 = weight(_text_:r in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03258863 = score(doc=4681,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.2194412 = fieldWeight in 4681, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4681)
0.06644399 = weight(_text_:l in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06644399 = score(doc=4681,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.37262368 = fieldWeight in 4681, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4681)
0.036469713 = weight(_text_:22 in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036469713 = score(doc=4681,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15710177 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4681, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4681)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- A recent publication in Nature reports that public R&D funding is only weakly correlated with the citation impact of a nation's articles as measured by the field-weighted citation index (FWCI; defined by Scopus). On the basis of the supplementary data, we up-scaled the design using Web of Science data for the decade 2003-2013 and OECD funding data for the corresponding decade assuming a 2-year delay (2001-2011). Using negative binomial regression analysis, we found very small coefficients, but the effects of international collaboration are positive and statistically significant, whereas the effects of government funding are negative, an order of magnitude smaller, and statistically nonsignificant (in two of three analyses). In other words, international collaboration improves the impact of research articles, whereas more government funding tends to have a small adverse effect when comparing OECD countries.
- Date
- 8. 1.2019 18:22:45
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Averaging and globalising quotients of informetric and scientometric data (1996)
0.06
0.058020666 = product of:
0.11604133 = sum of:
0.11604133 = sum of:
0.03258863 = weight(_text_:r in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03258863 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.2194412 = fieldWeight in 7659, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7659)
0.04698299 = weight(_text_:l in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04698299 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 7659, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7659)
0.036469713 = weight(_text_:22 in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036469713 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15710177 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7659, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7659)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.3, S.165-170
-
Marx, W.; Bornmann, L.: On the problems of dealing with bibliometric data (2014)
0.06
0.055635136 = product of:
0.11127027 = sum of:
0.11127027 = product of:
0.1669054 = sum of:
0.09396598 = weight(_text_:l in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09396598 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.52696943 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
0.072939426 = weight(_text_:22 in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.072939426 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15710177 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 18. 3.2014 19:13:22
-
Su, Y.; Han, L.-F.: ¬A new literature growth model : variable exponential growth law of literature (1998)
0.05
0.054754972 = product of:
0.109509945 = sum of:
0.109509945 = product of:
0.16426492 = sum of:
0.07830498 = weight(_text_:l in 3690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07830498 = score(doc=3690,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.4391412 = fieldWeight in 3690, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3690)
0.08595994 = weight(_text_:22 in 3690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08595994 = score(doc=3690,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15710177 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3690, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3690)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 5.1999 19:22:35
-
Harries, G.; Wilkinson, D.; Price, L.; Fairclough, R.; Thelwall, M.: Hyperlinks as a data source for science mapping : making sense of it all (2005)
0.05
0.053047746 = product of:
0.10609549 = sum of:
0.10609549 = product of:
0.15914324 = sum of:
0.06517726 = weight(_text_:r in 4654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06517726 = score(doc=4654,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.4388824 = fieldWeight in 4654, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4654)
0.09396598 = weight(_text_:l in 4654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09396598 = score(doc=4654,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.52696943 = fieldWeight in 4654, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4654)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Bornmann, L.; Bauer, J.; Haunschild, R.: Distribution of women and men among highly cited scientists (2015)
0.05
0.053047746 = product of:
0.10609549 = sum of:
0.10609549 = product of:
0.15914324 = sum of:
0.06517726 = weight(_text_:r in 2349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06517726 = score(doc=2349,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.4388824 = fieldWeight in 2349, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2349)
0.09396598 = weight(_text_:l in 2349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09396598 = score(doc=2349,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.52696943 = fieldWeight in 2349, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2349)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Egghe, L.; Liang, L.; Rousseau, R.: Fundamental properties of rhythm sequences (2008)
0.05
0.051186036 = product of:
0.10237207 = sum of:
0.10237207 = product of:
0.1535581 = sum of:
0.076040134 = weight(_text_:r in 1965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.076040134 = score(doc=1965,freq=8.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.51202947 = fieldWeight in 1965, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1965)
0.07751798 = weight(_text_:l in 1965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07751798 = score(doc=1965,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.4347276 = fieldWeight in 1965, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1965)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Fundamental mathematical properties of rhythm sequences are studied. In particular, a set of three axioms for valid rhythm indicators is proposed, and it is shown that the R-indicator satisfies only two out of three but that the R-indicator satisfies all three. This fills a critical, logical gap in the study of these indicator sequences. Matrices leading to a constant R-sequence are called baseline matrices. They are characterized as matrices with constant w-year diachronous impact factors. The relation with classical impact factors is clarified. Using regression analysis matrices with a rhythm sequence that is on average equal to 1 (smaller than 1, larger than 1) are characterized.
-
Egghe, L.; Liang, L.; Rousseau, R.: ¬A relation between h-index and impact factor in the power-law model (2009)
0.04
0.044014495 = product of:
0.08802899 = sum of:
0.08802899 = product of:
0.13204348 = sum of:
0.043451507 = weight(_text_:r in 6759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043451507 = score(doc=6759,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.29258826 = fieldWeight in 6759, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6759)
0.08859198 = weight(_text_:l in 6759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08859198 = score(doc=6759,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.49683157 = fieldWeight in 6759, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6759)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Liang, L.: R-Sequences : relative indicators for the rhythm of science (2005)
0.04
0.043617874 = product of:
0.08723575 = sum of:
0.08723575 = product of:
0.13085362 = sum of:
0.076040134 = weight(_text_:r in 3877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.076040134 = score(doc=3877,freq=8.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.51202947 = fieldWeight in 3877, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3877)
0.054813493 = weight(_text_:l in 3877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054813493 = score(doc=3877,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.30739886 = fieldWeight in 3877, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3877)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Like most activities in the world, scientific evolution has its own rhythm. How can this evolutionary rhythm be described and made visible? Do different fields have different rhythms, and how can they be measured? In order to answer these questions a relative indicator, called R-sequence, was designed. This indicator is time dependent, derived from publication and citation data, but independent of the absolute number of publications, as weIl as the absolute number of citations, and can therefore be used in a comparison of different scientific fields, nations, Institutes, or journals. Two caiculation methods of the R-sequence-the triangle method and the parallelogram method-are introduced. As a case study JASIS(T)'s R-sequence has been obtained.
-
Falkingham, L.T.; Reeves, R.: Context analysis : a technique for analysing research in a field, applied to literature on the management of R&D at the section level (1998)
0.04
0.03952938 = product of:
0.07905876 = sum of:
0.07905876 = product of:
0.118588135 = sum of:
0.076040134 = weight(_text_:r in 3689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.076040134 = score(doc=3689,freq=8.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.51202947 = fieldWeight in 3689, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3689)
0.042547997 = weight(_text_:22 in 3689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042547997 = score(doc=3689,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15710177 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3689, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3689)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Context analysis is a new method for appraising a body of publications. the process consists of creating a database of attributes assigned to each paper by the reviewer and then looking for interesting relationships in the data. Assigning the attributes requires an understanding of the subject matter of the papers. Presents findings about one particular research field, Management of R&D at the Section Level. The findings support the view that this body of academic publications does not meet the needs of practitioner R&D managers. Discusses practical aspects of how to apply the method in other fields
- Date
- 22. 5.1999 19:18:46
-
Burrell, Q.L.: Alternative thoughts on uncitedness (2012)
0.04
0.036193997 = product of:
0.07238799 = sum of:
0.07238799 = product of:
0.10858199 = sum of:
0.053768493 = weight(_text_:r in 290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053768493 = score(doc=290,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.3620595 = fieldWeight in 290, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=290)
0.054813493 = weight(_text_:l in 290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054813493 = score(doc=290,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.30739886 = fieldWeight in 290, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=290)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In a recent article, L. Egghe, R. Guns, and R. Rousseau () noted that in a study of some eminent scientists, many of them had a fair proportion of papers which were uncited and found this to be surprising. Here, we use the stochastic publication/citation model of Q.L. Burrell () to show that the result might in fact be expected. This brief communication is in the spirit of Q.L. Burrell (, ), showing that results that might at first sight seem to be surprising can in fact often be explainable in a stochastic framework.
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Duality in information retrieval and the hypegeometric distribution (1997)
0.04
0.035365164 = product of:
0.07073033 = sum of:
0.07073033 = product of:
0.10609549 = sum of:
0.043451507 = weight(_text_:r in 647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043451507 = score(doc=647,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.29258826 = fieldWeight in 647, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=647)
0.06264399 = weight(_text_:l in 647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06264399 = score(doc=647,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.35131297 = fieldWeight in 647, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=647)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: ¬The influence of publication delays on the observed aging distribution of scientific literature (2000)
0.04
0.035365164 = product of:
0.07073033 = sum of:
0.07073033 = product of:
0.10609549 = sum of:
0.043451507 = weight(_text_:r in 4385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043451507 = score(doc=4385,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.29258826 = fieldWeight in 4385, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4385)
0.06264399 = weight(_text_:l in 4385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06264399 = score(doc=4385,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.35131297 = fieldWeight in 4385, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4385)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Zhang, L.; Rousseau, R.; Glänzel, W.: Document-type country profiles (2011)
0.04
0.035365164 = product of:
0.07073033 = sum of:
0.07073033 = product of:
0.10609549 = sum of:
0.043451507 = weight(_text_:r in 4487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043451507 = score(doc=4487,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.29258826 = fieldWeight in 4487, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4487)
0.06264399 = weight(_text_:l in 4487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06264399 = score(doc=4487,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.35131297 = fieldWeight in 4487, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4487)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Schreiber, M.: ¬An empirical investigation of the g-index for 26 physicists in comparison with the h-index, the A-index, and the R-index (2008)
0.03
0.033292606 = product of:
0.06658521 = sum of:
0.06658521 = product of:
0.09987782 = sum of:
0.060725328 = weight(_text_:r in 1968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060725328 = score(doc=1968,freq=10.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.40890455 = fieldWeight in 1968, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1968)
0.03915249 = weight(_text_:l in 1968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03915249 = score(doc=1968,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.2195706 = fieldWeight in 1968, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1968)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- J.E. Hirsch (2005) introduced the h-index to quantify an individual's scientific research output by the largest number h of a scientist's papers that received at least h citations. To take into account the highly skewed frequency distribution of citations, L. Egghe (2006a) proposed the g-index as an improvement of the h-index. I have worked out 26 practical cases of physicists from the Institute of Physics at Chemnitz University of Technology, and compare the h and g values in this study. It is demonstrated that the g-index discriminates better between different citation patterns. This also can be achieved by evaluating B.H. Jin's (2006) A-index, which reflects the average number of citations in the h-core, and interpreting it in conjunction with the h-index. h and A can be combined into the R-index to measure the h-core's citation intensity. I also have determined the A and R values for the 26 datasets. For a better comparison, I utilize interpolated indices. The correlations between the various indices as well as with the total number of papers and the highest citation counts are discussed. The largest Pearson correlation coefficient is found between g and R. Although the correlation between g and h is relatively strong, the arrangement of the datasets is significantly different depending on whether they are put into order according to the values of either h or g.
- Object
- R-Index
-
Egghe, L.; Leydesdorff, L.: ¬The relation between Pearson's correlation coefficient r and Salton's cosine measure (2009)
0.03
0.033010874 = product of:
0.06602175 = sum of:
0.06602175 = product of:
0.09903262 = sum of:
0.03258863 = weight(_text_:r in 2803) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03258863 = score(doc=2803,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.2194412 = fieldWeight in 2803, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2803)
0.06644399 = weight(_text_:l in 2803) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06644399 = score(doc=2803,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.37262368 = fieldWeight in 2803, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2803)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.; Daniel, H.D.: Do we need the h index and its variants in addition to standard bibliometric measures? (2009)
0.03
0.031258687 = product of:
0.062517375 = sum of:
0.062517375 = product of:
0.09377606 = sum of:
0.03840607 = weight(_text_:r in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03840607 = score(doc=2861,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.25861394 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
0.055369988 = weight(_text_:l in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055369988 = score(doc=2861,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.31051973 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In this study, we investigate whether there is a need for the h index and its variants in addition to standard bibliometric measures (SBMs). Results from our recent study (L. Bornmann, R. Mutz, & H.-D. Daniel, 2008) have indicated that there are two types of indices: One type of indices (e.g., h index) describes the most productive core of a scientist's output and informs about the number of papers in the core. The other type of indices (e.g., a index) depicts the impact of the papers in the core. In evaluative bibliometric studies, the two dimensions quantity and quality of output are usually assessed using the SBMs number of publications (for the quantity dimension) and total citation counts (for the impact dimension). We additionally included the SBMs into the factor analysis. The results of the newly calculated analysis indicate that there is a high intercorrelation between number of publications and the indices that load substantially on the factor Quantity of the Productive Core as well as between total citation counts and the indices that load substantially on the factor Impact of the Productive Core. The high-loading indices and SBMs within one performance dimension could be called redundant in empirical application, as high intercorrelations between different indicators are a sign for measuring something similar (or the same). Based on our findings, we propose the use of any pair of indicators (one relating to the number of papers in a researcher's productive core and one relating to the impact of these core papers) as a meaningful approach for comparing scientists.
-
Egghe, L.: Mathematical study of h-index sequences (2009)
0.03
0.031258687 = product of:
0.062517375 = sum of:
0.062517375 = product of:
0.09377606 = sum of:
0.03840607 = weight(_text_:r in 4217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03840607 = score(doc=4217,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.25861394 = fieldWeight in 4217, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4217)
0.055369988 = weight(_text_:l in 4217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055369988 = score(doc=4217,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.31051973 = fieldWeight in 4217, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4217)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper studies mathematical properties of h-index sequences as developed by Liang [Liang, L. (2006). h-Index sequence and h-index matrix: Constructions and applications. Scientometrics, 69(1), 153-159]. For practical reasons, Liming studies such sequences where the time goes backwards while it is more logical to use the time going forward (real career periods). Both type of h-index sequences are studied here and their interrelations are revealed. We show cases where these sequences are convex, linear and concave. We also show that, when one of the sequences is convex then the other one is concave, showing that the reverse-time sequence, in general, cannot be used to derive similar properties of the (difficult to obtain) forward time sequence. We show that both sequences are the same if and only if the author produces the same number of papers per year. If the author produces an increasing number of papers per year, then Liang's h-sequences are above the "normal" ones. All these results are also valid for g- and R-sequences. The results are confirmed by the h-, g- and R-sequences (forward and reverse time) of the author.
-
Egghe, L.; Guns, R.; Rousseau, R.: Thoughts on uncitedness : Nobel laureates and Fields medalists as case studies (2011)
0.03
0.031023424 = product of:
0.06204685 = sum of:
0.06204685 = product of:
0.09307027 = sum of:
0.04608728 = weight(_text_:r in 4994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04608728 = score(doc=4994,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14850734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.3103367 = fieldWeight in 4994, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4994)
0.04698299 = weight(_text_:l in 4994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04698299 = score(doc=4994,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17831391 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.044862766 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 4994, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4994)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
